Performance measure noise can be a critical barrier to employees' learning. Using an experiment, we examine whether the effects of performance measure noise on employees' learning depends on the type of learning in which employees engage: experiential versus vicarious. We predict and find performance measure noise has a more deleterious effect on learning when such learning occurs experientially rather than vicariously. Specifically, we find experiential learners demonstrate less learning as performance measure noise increases, but vicarious learners show no such effect of performance measure noise. Collectively, our findings suggest performance measure noise and learning type play important roles in the extent to which firms realize the decision-facilitating benefits of performance measurement systems. In particular, since much of the learning in modern organizations occurs vicariously, our findings suggest performance measure noise may not be as detrimental to employees' learning as previously thought.

Recent technological advances make it possible to create automated virtual interviewers, called embodied conversational agents (ECAs). We study how an ECA compares to a human interviewer in three experiments. In experiment 1, we show that two theoretically motivated factors—making the ECA facially and vocally similar to the interviewee—result in the ECA performing similarly to or better than human interviewers for six antecedents of disclosure quality. In two additional experiments, we show that employees are, on average, 21 to 32 percent more likely to disclose violating internal controls to an ECA than to a human, even if the human interviewer has significant interviewing experience. These findings contribute to the ECA design literature by showing that similarity-enhancing features of ECAs increase the antecedents of disclosure. The findings also contribute to the accounting literature by demonstrating that ECA technology can increase the scope of interviewing in accounting without reducing interview quality.

Employee contracts often allow for managerial discretion, such that the manager decides after observing an employee's performance how that employee will be rewarded or penalized. Importantly, the effects of such evaluation outcomes can extend beyond the employee(s) directly affected, because such outcomes can be observed by other employees within the firm. The net effect of such vicarious learning as an indirect control depends on the inferences employees make after observing a peer's evaluation outcome. In this study, we use an experiment to investigate whether the inferences observer-employees make about how managers evaluate and reward employee behavior depend on whether the valence of the observed outcome is positive or negative. Using the setting of a strategic performance measurement system, we test and find support for a causal model, in which the valence of the observed outcome influences observer-employees' inferences and subsequent behavioral focus via their psychological distance from, and their construal of, the observed outcome. Our results suggest that how observer-employees respond after observing a peer employee's evaluation outcome is asymmetric. Specifically, when contemplating their own behavior, employees who observe positive outcomes focus on the performance measures within the strategic performance measurement system, whereas those who observe negative outcomes focus on the underlying strategic construct.

This study investigates whether the timely revelation of bad earnings news is associated with a lower incidence of litigation. The timeliness of earnings news is captured by a new measure based on the evolution of the consensus analyst earnings forecast. Holding total bad earnings news and other determinants of litigation constant, we find that earlier revelation of bad earnings news lowers the likelihood of litigation. This result holds for both settled and dismissed lawsuits. Further, we reconcile our findings with prior work that measures timeliness using managerial warnings via press releases. These tests suggest our findings are attributable to the ability of our timeliness measure to capture bad earning news revealed through disclosure channels beyond press releases. Data Availability: Data are available from public sources identified in the paper.

In recent years, many companies have emphasized adjusted-GAAP earnings numbers in their quarterly press releases. While managers use different names to describe these nonstandard earnings metrics, the financial press frequently refers to them as “pro forma” earnings. Managers and other advocates of pro forma reporting argue that these disclosures provide a clearer picture of companies' core earnings. On the other hand, regulators, policymakers, and the financial press often allege that managers' pro forma earnings disclosures are opportunistic attempts to mislead investors. Recent evidence suggests that while many pro forma earnings disclosures are altruistically motivated, some may represent managers' attempts to portray overly optimistic financial performance. If this is the case, then less wealthy, less sophisticated, individual investors are arguably the most at risk of being misled. Consequently, this study investigates who trades on pro forma earnings information. Our intraday investigation of transactions around earnings announcements containing pro forma earnings information reveals that less sophisticated investors' announcement-period abnormal trading is significantly positively associated with the magnitude and direction of the earnings surprise based on pro forma earnings. In contrast, we find no association between sophisticated investors' trading and manager-reported pro forma information. Overall, our analyses and numerous robustness tests suggest that the segment of the market that relies on pro forma earnings information is populated predominantly by less sophisticated individual investors. This evidence is particularly relevant to standard-setters and regulators given that Section 401(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and subsequent SEC regulations are specifically designed to protect ordinary investors from misleading pro forma information.

We study the sources of high end-of-life spending for cancer patients. Even among patients with similar initial prognoses, spending in the year postdiagnosis is over twice as high for those who die within the year than those who survive. Elevated spending on decedents is predominantly driven by higher inpatient spending, particularly low-intensity admissions. However, most such admissions do not result in death, making it difficult to target spending reductions. Furthermore, end-of-life spending is substantially more elevated for younger patients, compared to older patients with similar prognoses. Results highlight sources of high end-of-life spending without revealing any natural “remedies.”

This paper provides a unique snapshot of the asset exposures of EU banks to shadow banking entities within the global financial system. Drawing on a rich and novel dataset, we show that 60% of the EU banks’ exposures are towards non-EU entities, particularly US-domiciled shadow banking entities. We assess the degree of concentration across different types of shadow banking counterparties. We show that while banks’ exposures are diversified at the individual level, this diversification leads to high overlap across different types of shadow banking entities, with consequent systemic risk. We also examine how bank- and country-level characteristics relate to the exposures of EU banks to shadow banking entities. Our results emphasise the importance of monitoring these cross-border and cross-sector exposures and closing remaining data gaps.

This study examines European stock market reactions to 16 events associated with the adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in Europe. European IFRS adoption represented a major milestone toward financial reporting convergence yet spurred controversy reaching the highest levels of government. We find an incrementally positive reaction for firms with lower quality pre-adoption information, which is more pronounced for banks, and with higher pre-adoption information asymmetry, consistent with investors expecting net information quality benefits from IFRS adoption. We find an incrementally negative reaction for firms domiciled in code law countries, consistent with investors' concerns over enforcement of IFRS in those countries. Finally, we find a positive reaction to IFRS adoption events for firms with high-quality pre-adoption information, consistent with investors expecting net convergence benefits from IFRS adoption.

US health care expenditures reached $2.5 trillion in 2009, representing 17.6 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) and $8,086 per person (US Department of Health and Human Services Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services 2011). Since health care represents a large and growing share of the economy, and factors such as population aging imply that chronic disease treatment will continue to expand as a share of health expenditures, developing methods for assessing the value of quality improvement for chronic disease spending is of increasing importance for accurately measuring real economic activity. This paper develops a method for assessing the value of quality changes associated with health care for patients living with one important chronic disease, diabetes mellitus, using 11 years of detailed data on spending and quality of care for over 800 patients. We first provide an overview of measurement issues for health care quality, and then present our data, methods, results, and a brief discussion.

This paper examines the effects of privatizing social health insurance in the United States. We study this question in the context of the Medicaid program, the largest health insurer in the US and the largest means-tested program in the nation -serving over 90 million low-income families and individuals with disabilities. Exploiting a natural experiment wherein nearly 100,000 Medicaid enrollees were randomly assigned between a state-administered fee-for-service system and private managed care, we find that spending was nearly 10% lower for enrollees assigned to managed care plans. These savings were concentrated in prescription drugs, where we show that prior authorization was the key mechanism plans used to reduce overuse and encourage substitution to lower-cost alternatives without reducing quality. This was distinct from the effects of privatization on medical benefits, where private plans lowered quality and abraded consumers without achieving savings. In contrast to what our findings imply for an efficient public-private division of services, Medicaid has historically favored the public provision of prescription drugs and private outsourcing of medical care.